I’ve always known that things work differently over here. A few weeks ago when authorities discovered a Republican weapons cache in Northern Ireland, it made national news. The arsenal consisted of two shotguns, a couple of pistols and a semi-automatic rifle. I’m not entirely sure, but I swear I saw more than that in the passenger seat of my uncle’s pickup last time I was home.

In the United Kingdom, Harry Potter is a good read for kids and has received several awards attesting to that fact. In some parts of the United States, the little wizard is cause for a book burning down at the school library.

These kinds of differences are easy to understand. Guns in Northern Ireland are a big deal because of the ongoing war between Protestants and Catholics. The tenuous Good Friday agreement is having enough trouble being implemented without added violence. Harry Potter is vilified in some American circles because those people are off their nut.

There, those were simple. One difference hasn’t been so easy for me to understand. The election of Austria’s Freedom Party to power and the subsequent reaction by the European Union will take a little more explaining.

The Freedom Party, led by Joerg Haider, recently received 27 percent of the vote in Austrian parliamentary elections. The party has since joined the governing coalition and has several of its members in key cabinet positions.

The European Union has responded with outrage, imposing sanctions and calling meetings to determine other possible actions. Human rights groups are calling for the Austrian election results to be annulled.

What could have caused all this trouble? The apparent answer: Joerg Haider.

In order to understand the great debate that Haider and the Freedom Party are causing across Europe, I think it is important that one realizes the context in which it is occurring.

Europe is much further left on the political spectrum than America.

Nationalized healthcare and industry are the norms, not the exception. Even the more conservative actors in the European scene have ideals that would make any self-respecting American Democrat blush.

Additionally, World War II is still fresh in Europe’s collective memory. While many American soldiers fought bravely in the war, Main Street, USA, was largely spared the harsh brutality of battle. The same cannot be said for much of Europe. Here in Exeter, for example, there is a bombed-out church that stands as a memorial to the civilians who died in German air raids. Such reminders dot the countryside of the nations of Europe. Anyone over the age of 60 can remember what it was like to live in a war.

Upon learning of the Freedom Party’s success, Robin Cook, UK foreign secretary, said, “Mr Haider’s values of xenophobia, racism, far-right extremism and his affection for the SS all strike at the values of the European Union.”

Joerg Haider’s fiery rhetoric stirs many memories of World War II. He has made many references to Nazi practices — such as this one in July, 1991: “In the Third Reich they had an ‘orderly’ employment policy.”

According to the BBC, he later gave a statement of retraction: “I unequivocally made the point that this remark was not made with the meaning understood by you. If it reassures you, then I take back the remark with regret.”

Clearly, it is not politically (or otherwise) correct for a leader to even give the impression that he agrees with anything related to the Nazis. Is it possible, however, that remarks such as this are simply being used by Haider’s political opponents to keep his movement against European integration from foiling their plans for the European Union?

In looking at the Freedom Party, one sees more in common with the protesters at Seattle’s WTO summit than with the Third Reich. The party campaigns for tighter immigration laws and against globalization. These ideals stand in direct conflict with the dominant sentiment within the European hierarchy.

It is clear that Haider is not fit to head the Freedom Party. His comments act as a lightening rod for criticism, allowing the party’s opponents to ignore the party’s issues in favor of demagouging its clumsy-mouthed leader. To punish the entire party — let alone all of Austria — for some foolish statements is a mistake.

The ruling circle of the European Union is quaking in its boots over the anti-integration movement’s recent surge in popularity, and rightly so. But in taking such heavy-handed action against a relatively small player, the EU is only encouraging the question, “What will be the next policy decision to fall to the ‘the values of the European Union?'” This is a mistake.

The European Union and the international community at large should leave Austria to its own business.

Surely they should watch that the Freedom Party doesn’t start committing atrocities, but I am convinced that there is no cause for alarm. It’s just people playing dirty politics.

---

Chris Crouch is a sophomore in political science from Rapid City, Ill.